Forums39
Topics39,564
Posts320,870
Members26,686
|
Most Online4,031 Dec 15th, 2024
|
|
Posts: 7,378
Joined: November 2002
|
|
28 members (CLIFFTOPS, Todd, BillDauterive, Don_and_Linda, Alltech63, eightzerobits, SXMBND, SXMbeacher, RickinAtlanta, RonDon, pedalpusher, JeanneB, CaribbeanCanadians, jrw, MrEZgoin, bailau, bostonbob, Whale Tail, cabokid, Time Will Tell, RickG, IWIWSE, SXMScubaman, 5 invisible),
1,414
guests, and
93
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
.
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 83,992 Likes: 4
Traveler
|
Traveler
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 83,992 Likes: 4 |
Well, I'm confused, what was the result?? I guess the judge ruled in favor of the restaurant owners? The Daily Herald doesn't have today's full paper online, as of yet, anyway..
Carol Hill
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,531
Traveler
|
Traveler
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,531 |
The way it sounded to me is that the Collectivite didn't defend their position, so the restaurant owners won by default.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 83,992 Likes: 4
Traveler
|
Traveler
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 83,992 Likes: 4 |
That's sort of what it sounds like, but the story doesn't even really say what happened, like it was just a follow-up story, explaining why something happened.
Carol Hill
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 186
Traveler
|
Traveler
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 186 |
GaKaye said: The way it sounded to me is that the Collectivite didn't defend their position, so the restaurant owners won by default. That's how I read it too
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,595 Likes: 2
Traveler
|
Traveler
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,595 Likes: 2 |
When I read both stories noted on estellaesxm. post, I got the impression that by not defending position the restaurant owners are able to put out chair etc, however; I believe they still have to get an AOL and pay a fee. AOL's limit the number of chairs that can be placed.
I think because one establishment abused this, and due to greed, placed chairs up to water's edge thus blocking walkers from traversing the beach which is public. Thus, because of one, all suffer. Time will tell if the Collective enforces AOL's.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 194
Traveler
|
Traveler
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 194 |
One person started it.
On Tuesday, after a long meeting, the proposal was adopted by a single vote; since the five other elected officials and members of the executive council had abstained
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 83,992 Likes: 4
Traveler
|
Traveler
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 83,992 Likes: 4 |
Was finally able to see yesterday's full Daily Herald online. Yes, the court annulled the decision of the Council, stating they did not have the authority to make the decision. It wasn't clear to me whether this was because the President was the only vote or what the specific reason was. The story did seem to say that the restaurants still would need to get AOT's (leases) in order to place chairs on the beach..
Carol Hill
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 681
Traveler
|
Traveler
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 681 |
Confused by a sentence in the 2nd link - ie 5 questions ...
"... It should be noted that some beaches are private in Saint-Martin and are therefore subject to an AOT; they have been sold by the State to individuals. Such is the case for plots of land in Nettle Bay, Friar's Bay, Orient Bay and the Anse Marcel Cove. ..."
Private beaces are subject to AOT? does not make sense and Orient Bay has a private beach ie land sold to?
Am I mis reading this or is there a mistake in the story or?
J&B
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,531
Traveler
|
Traveler
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,531 |
The way I interpreted this is that the public beaches have been made somewhat private by the sale of the AOT. Individuals who "own" the AOT have the privilege of the private occupation of the beach.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,595 Likes: 2
Traveler
|
Traveler
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,595 Likes: 2 |
I think the "private beach" in Orient refers to Club O section. There was a previous post about the special disposition to allow total nudity. Sorry but I don't remember exactly what it was.
La Samana has the right to a portion of Baie Longue and can keep people away. Nettle Bay has villas that purchase privacy in front of these villas.
Grand Case Bach Club has a portion of Grand Case beach that is posted "residents & guest only" .
But I don't know what is deemed private in Anse Marcel.
|
|
|
|
|